Namasté

[Abracadabra]

In other words, thus far Science = Mysticism when it comes to the core of understanding reality. The scientists aren't any closer to knowing truth than the Eastern Mystics were. In fact, the scientists have only shown that there does indeed exist a way for the Mystics to be right.

I seem to have a problem with that statement. I am no scientist but I would say science is quite different from Mysticism. Doesn't know everything about reality doesn't make it mysticism. The two approaches to understand reality of science and mysticism is also different. I think science is just a method using supportive evidence to explain the physical world. I see mysticism as something more religious and spiritual that doesn't seem to have much to do with investigating reality with hard evidence or reasonable theories.

I do not know what you mean by "truth", is there such thing as an "ultimate truth"? I don't know but science had helped create applicable things and invention while I do not see mystics being able to do that.

Would you kindly provide examples of how science had helped support mystics' belief?

Sure, I'll give you a couple examples. However first I would like to clear something up. You make a statement that isn't exactly true, yet you state it as though you believe it to be truth.

You say, "I think science is just a method using supportive evidence to explain the physical world. I see mysticism as something more religious and spiritual that doesn't seem to have much to do with investigating reality with hard evidence or reasonable theories."

That's actually incorrect. The methods used by "mystics" are indeed diverse. Mysticism never grew to become a "single method" of inquire. There are many different philosophies of mysticism. Some are far more pragmatic than others. Some are indeed outright guesses, and superstitious baloney. It's not my intent to actually support any specific religious dogma.

However, getting back to your question of how science supports various mystical concepts,.... To begin with, science is beginning to understand that the divisions between things are indeed superficial and not nearly as concrete as people used to think back in the days of classical physics.

Thus science supports one of the basic concepts of mysticism: "All is One".

If there's no "real" division between things that we can truly put a finger on, then the conclusion of the mystics that "All is One" is certainly supported.

In fact, even Einstein's discovery of E=mc² shows us that there really isn't even any real difference between what we perceive to be "matter" and what we perceive to be "energy". Moreover, science truly has no clue at all what "energy" even is. Sure, they have a name for it and they can give it a quantitative value. But trying to explain what it actually is eludes science completely.

So here we have science confirming that All is One.

Science arrived at this via many years of experiment and observation. The mystics arrived at it via nothing more than serious contemplation. They simply figured out that it could be no other way. That was no mistake on their part. They basically ruled out all other possibilities and that's all that was left. So there is a method to their madness.

Now Quantum Mechanics is revealing a similar situation.

Another thing also is that the mystics have concluded that mind give rise to what we see as physical reality (not the other way around).

Well, that's what I was getting at about "information" preexisting what we call "Physical Reality". Some sort of "information" had to exist prior to the Big Bang. Our best theories today actually assume that this is indeed the case. In fact they require that this is the case.

So there's at least two examples where scientific inquire has led to the very same conclusions that had been made by the Eastern Mystics.

The mystics are now just standing around telling the modern western scientists, "We told you so".

It's not news to them.